XP was released when new computers would have been high end Pentium 3's or early sub 2.0ghz P4's. The original version of XP with the software at the time ran quite well on these platforms, and you can still nicely run XP on a Pentium 3

It is not the way forward to make OS's more and more complex I don't think. A faster machine should be used to run whatever you want to use it for. It shouldn't be used up by the GUI and whatever else is going on underneath.

Yeah I kind of agree with that. Whats the point in hardware speed advances if its all used up running the os but on the other hand we don't want to be running 3.1 still

It’s difficult enough to hear or see the words “Windows Seven” or any variation thereof, much less any detailed information about it, straight from Microsoft but Windows 8? While it’s certainly true that a mere mention of such a version of Windows is quite frivolous in and of itself, it just lends yet another to the seemingly long line of Windows service packs and revisions awaiting us. Yes, it appears as though the days of enjoyable hot spots for codenames are long gone: A sign of development internally being far from a vacation? Perhaps. Then again, there is rumor of a couple of potential codenames for Windows 8: Mystic or Orient...